Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why are Texas interchanges so tall?

practical.engineering

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 352 posts

Re: Why are Texas interchanges so tall?

#321

Post by qorrect »

consteval wrote: post #295
mulmen wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Texas is a lot more than that, certainly.

Texas can be a lot more than that. There's a lot of culture here, particularly in South Texas. But there's also contention. There's a disdain for that part of Texas. And the washed out, strip mall side of Texas wants very badly to make it seem like they're all there is. The boredom, the normality, the white picket fence, is a plague. It spreads and sucks the color out of everything, like The Wizard of Oz but in rever…

Very well said.

Re: Why are Texas interchanges so tall?

#322

Post by tonymet »

Ylpertnodi wrote: post #274
tonymet wrote: post #177

i resent the default cynicism that is trendy when discussing highway infra. A clear bias against cars as ugly, dirty , polluting, etc. This interchange provides food and prosperity to millions of people. And it's an incredible feat. The cynical attitude is just cliche and tacky give it up.

...just wait til you see this about North American (US and Canada) firetrucks: https://youtu.be/j2dHFC31VtQ?t=21

thank you for sharing I found this entertaining and cringe-worthy

Re: Why are Texas interchanges so tall?

#323

Post by tptacek »

DidYaWipe wrote: post #306
macNchz wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on the price of houses in walkable/transit accessible parts of older American cities, there’s quite clearly a market for it. Ultimately, many Americans have basically no reference point for what it would be like to not depend on a car—it’s just what they’ve always known—so I’m sure you’re correct in that most would say they weren’t interested in living that way, but that’s not much of a reason to make rules aga…

That isn't the reason. The reason is that people who don't want to live that way have specifically chosen to live in an area developed in a different way. Why should that be destroyed or vilified? I see the appeal of both kinds of lifestyle. Some of my best friends live in nice Chicago neighborhoods where they don't need cars. They are not rich or even significantly "well-off" by most standards, and their homes did n…

The rules you're talking about were uniformly created as a way to replace de jure racial segregation, which was outlawed surprisingly early in the 20th century, with de facto racial segregation. People supply post-hoc rationalizations for density restrictions, and some of them might even be valid, especially as you get further away from urban cores, but just to be clear: the Chesterton analysis here says these fences were erected by morons; they do not inherit a presumption of reasonableness.

My confidence about this take is pretty high throughout the continental United States, but in Chicago it is something like 100%, since this is a local policy issue I work on here.

Re: Why are Texas interchanges so tall?

#324

Post by macNchz »

DidYaWipe wrote: post #305
macNchz wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My main complaint is that the people who like suburban density went ahead and made zoning codes to basically prevent building anything but sprawl, so now the few remaining places that don't require a car are rare and super expensive. I'm even a car guy—I own a stick shift BMW—I just don't have much interest in getting into it to do literally any activity or errand other than walking around the neighborhood.

"The people who like suburban density went ahead and made zoning codes to basically prevent building anything but sprawl" What, exactly, qualifies as "sprawl" to you? Houses with yards? How do you propose we build those to make them "non-sprawly?" Most of your statement is true, though: "People who like suburban density went ahead and made zoning codes to basically prevent building anything but" that density. So? Tho…

American sprawl at its core, I think, is driven by single family residential-only zoning with parking minimums. In combination these rules force everything to spread out.

Single family homes can exist in non-sprawling configurations (e.g. old streetcar suburbs), but in combination with the other rules you wind up with businesses that are required to be far away from homes, to have large parking lots, and therefore be mostly hostile to anyone arriving outside of a car.

I look at the nice rural town I grew up in and the city brownstone neighborhood I live in now, and see two places with lots of real estate demand that could not, in much of America, be built today. The very nature of why these places are appealing comes from the fact they were built before these zoning codes. The businesses and schools are in walking distance of houses and have far too little parking.

I don’t see why we can’t relax some of the rules in some places and let people have a choice.

Re: Why are Texas interchanges so tall?

#325

Post by malshe »

msisk6 wrote: post #163
malshe wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Me too! I can’t avoid them all the time but I slow down as much as I can safely (this is Texas so everyone drives at least 20 miles over the limit) and look straight ahead.

Once I was cruising down the 130 toll road around Austin just after rush hour listening to the radio and just keeping up with traffic. Then traffic started pulling away from me and I couldn't keep up; my truck wouldn't go any faster. Thinking I was having a problem I looked at the dash and noticed I was going 105 mph and was up against the speed limiter on my truck. Yeah, even when the speed limit is 85 that's not en…

Ah 130 toll road! Yeah, I can totally imagine people zooming past you even when you were driving at 100+

Re: Why are Texas interchanges so tall?

#326

Post by geophph »

hoten wrote: post #138
nabla9 wrote: post #26

First time I visited the US it was Houston, Texas. My host was perplexed because I laughed out loud while we were driving. Experiencing highways and those massive gas stations felt like someone had made a state that mocked America by taking prejudices we have about the American traffic and making them 200% larger in real life. My mind was blown.

Houston native here. I still guffaw when I see a massively lifted truck (but with a pristine bed, no scratches - so not even a work truck). Everything's bigger in Texas, including egos.

We call them gender affirming care. Or emotional support vehicles.

Re: Why are Texas interchanges so tall?

#327

Post by rangestransform »

nkrisc wrote: post #198
delta_p_delta_x wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We have a big-ass country. We like to move about it. Many of us don't want or need to live on top of each other. That is all. Japan is about the size of the entire Eastern Seaboard. Japan has safe, fast, comfortable and competitively-priced high-speed rail through highly mountainous, earthquake-prone terrain. What's the USA's excuse? No one is asking for a 4500 km-long railway from Los Angeles to New York. But a 15…

Huh? You can take a train from New York to Washington. It’s not high speed rail but it’s not even a day trip. You could go there and back in one day and still get stuff done at the other end. It’d be a bit of a long day but nothing outrageous. In fact, the Eastern seaboard is one of the few places in the US where rail travel is a valid option much of the time.

Acela from NYC to Washington is a piss-poor excuse of """""""high speed rail""""""", certainly rock bottom dogshit tier travel times when you compare it to other city pairs with similar GDPs and similar distances

Re: Why are Texas interchanges so tall?

#328

Post by adamisom »

otteromkram wrote: post #264
next_xibalba wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Texan here. My experience has been quite different. I lived in Austin for 7 years and I had no idea about this fact. Whenever the whole "everything is bigger in Texas" comes up, everyone smiles and rolls their eyes. I now live in Houston and its the same. People here think its kind of a joke. Though Texans definitely do take pride in Texas. I just don't think they take themselves as seriously as your comment suggests…

[flagged]

Heh, only the laughingstock to you and your bubble, I guess

Re: Why are Texas interchanges so tall?

#329

Post by guywithahat »

DidYaWipe wrote: post #139

"the worst symbol of our car-obsessed culture" Nothing against the article, which covers an interesting topic. But this refrain gets tiresome, the railing against our "car obsession." We have a big-ass country. We like to move about it. Many of us don't want or need to live on top of each other. That is all.

It’s not even that bad. If you go to Houston, there are plenty of parts which are so walking/transit focused you don’t need a car.

I’d argue the real reason people have cars is because if rent for a nice 1-bed only costs 700-1500 it doesn’t make sense to not also own a car. When people talk about a city that’s not “car-obsessed”, they’re usually referring to some place where even the wealthy can barely afford a car.

Re: Why are Texas interchanges so tall?

#330

Post by bamboozled »

kulahan wrote: post #263
bamboozled wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Japan is awesome like this, they have amazing highways and rail. Tokyo in my option is a bit too car friendly but it’s still very walkable and rideable.

Japan is an extremely small island. I don’t think a lot of their experience would apply to us. China may be a better example.

LA to San Fran could be doing a lot better is what you’re saying ?
Post reply on HN